[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: RE: A call for reason

• From: "Gavin Thomas Nicol" <gtn@e...>
• To: <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 17:04:13 -0500

> These stringent error-reporting requirements that you 
> complain about are syntax errors, sometimes run-time errors
> - and the WG is quite correct in requiring the parser to kick 
> nonconforming documents out instead of trying to figure out 
> what they meant to say.  If it's broken at that basic a level, 
> it doesn't need to be set loose - make the author fix the 
> errors first.

Absolutely in agreement.

FWIW. It was the browser vendors that asked for draconian
error handling... to the surprise of many XML-WG members.


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• References:
  • re: RE: A call for reason
    • From: rev-bob@g...

• Prev by Date: re: RE: A call for reason
• Next by Date: RE: A call for reason, another go [SML et al]
• Previous by thread: re: RE: A call for reason
• Next by thread: RE: [SML] RE: Forget SML. We need RTSML.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread